This text was pulled from the PDF automatically and may contain mistakes. The PDF is the official record, so check it before relying on this.
Page 1
UTILITY COMMITTEE
AGENDA
MARCH 25, 2013 - 5:00 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
15 LOOCKERMAN PLAZA
DOVER, DELAWARE
Public comments are welcomed on any item and will be permitted at appropriate
times. When possible, please notify the City Clerk (736-7008 or e-mail at
CityClerk@dover.de.us) should you wish to be recognized.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
1. Presentation by Calpine and KVAERNER on Employment and Construction Plans
(Committee Action Not Required)
2. Proposed Amendments to the Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk
Management
(Staff Recommends Approval of the Policy Amendments, as Presented, to Comply with
Federal Regulations on Power Supply Transactions)
3. Adjournment by 5:25 P.M.
/tm
S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Committee-Agendas\2013\03-25-2013 UTILITY.wpd
THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO
INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
Page 2
City of Dover, Delaware
Governing Policy
For
Energy Commodity
Risk Management
Effective: September 10, 2012
Approved by: City of Dover Council
Date: September 10, 2012
Page 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY ..................................................................3
A. Introduction.....................................................................................................................3
B. Scope of Policy ................................................................................................................3
C. Objectives and Risk Philosophy ...................................................................................4
D. Policy Administration ....................................................................................................4
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS .............................................................................................4
A. Utility Committee of The City Council .......................................................................5
B. Executive Risk Management Committee ....................................................................5
1. City Manager .............................................................................................................................. 6
2. Director of the Utility................................................................................................................. 7
3. Controller .................................................................................................................................... 7
4. TEA Member Services Manager............................................................................................... 7
DISCUSSION OF RISKS ...............................................................................................................8
MARKETING AND TRADING PRACTICES ..............................................................................9
A. Standards of Conduct ....................................................................................................9
B. Products, Activities and Limitations ...........................................................................9
C. Contract Documentation and Confirmations...........................................................10
D. Training..........................................................................................................................10
E. New Product Protocol .............................................................................................1110
RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS...........................................................................11
A. Limits..............................................................................................................................11
1. Volume/Maturity/Value Limits ........................................................................................... 11
B. Stress Testing and Back Testing .................................................................................12
C. Instances of Exceeding Risk Limits............................................................................12
CREDIT POLICY ..........................................................................................................................12
A. Measuring Credit Risk .................................................................................................12
B. Analysis and Extension of Credit Limits ..................................................................13
C. Instances of Exceeding Credit Limits ........................................................................13
REPORTING .................................................................................................................................14
A. Risk Reporting ..............................................................................................................14
B. Credit Reporting ...........................................................................................................15
C. Hedge Effectiveness Reporting ..................................................................................15
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS ............................................................................15
POLICY DISTRIBUTION AND COUNSEL ...............................................................................16
A. Distribution Outside The City ....................................................................................16
B. Designated Counsel .....................................................................................................16
APPENDIX A – Approved Products .............................................................................................16
APPENDIX B – Approved Counterparties and Threshold Tables ................................................17
APPENDIX C – Business Risks ....................................................................................................21
APPENDIX D – Glossary ............................................................................................................21
2
Page 4
PURPOSE OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY
A. Introduction
The City of Dover (“City”) and its customers are routinely exposed to energy price risk,
volume variability risk, basis risk and credit risk – herein referred to collectively as
energy commodity risk - in the normal conduct of serving its electric load requirements.
Volatility of energy commodity prices and volumetric uncertainty (either
supply/generation or load obligations) impose a substantial and direct risk to the City’s
financial and operating performance.
By authority of its charter, the City has responsibility for overseeing the City’s
electricity operations, including the management of its cost of serving Dover’s
customers. By agreement dated May 6, 2011 and approved by the City (the “EMA”),
the City has engaged The Energy Authority, Inc. (“TEA”) to assist the City with Asset
Management and Strategic Planning Services, Risk Management Services, and Energy
Management Services.
This Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management (“Policy”) is established the
explicit understanding that the City has retained and delegated responsibilities to TEA
to provide Risk Management Services.
Additionally, the City has issued this Policy for dealing with the philosophy,
framework and delegation of responsibilities necessary to govern activities related to
Dover’s energy commodity risk management. As set forth herein, the City has
established an organizational structure, delegated responsibility and established
internal controls and procedures to ensure that all transactional and oversight activities
are conducted in compliance with this Policy and in accordance with the City’s normal
reporting, legal, financing and regulatory requirements relating to energy assets and
transactions.
B. Scope of Policy
This Policy covers all transactions entered into the by the City of Dover designed to
meet the City’s electric load requirement and the management of risk related to these
transactions.
In the event of conflict between this Policy and the EMA, the Policy shall control.
This Policy is separate and distinct from enterprise risk management policies and
procedures addressing the City’s safe operation of its generating stations and energy
infrastructure, insurance requirements, permit compliance, employee matters
regulatory compliance with laws and regulations of the State of Delaware and Federal
3
Page 5
Agencies such as EPA, FERC, NERC and CFTC or other potential risks to the City
beyond the purchase and sale of fuel and electric power and its ancillary products.
C. Objectives and Risk Philosophy
The objectives of the Policy are to identify energy commodity price and credit risk
exposures and give the City a framework for the quantification and management of
these exposures. The Policy will identify the reports needed to convey how the
identified risk exposures can potentially impact the City’s overall cost of providing
electricity service to its customers and report on the risk management of the
transactions associated with City’s electric load requirements.
Under the Policy, risk management activities will be conducted consistent with the
City’s overall objective of appropriate risk mitigation. There are several objectives of
the Policy which, when taken and executed together, serve to manage the City’s energy
commodity price exposures. Specifically, the Policy:
Establishes framework for developing credit limits for counterparties and quantifies
and manages the credit exposures related to potential counterparty abrogation
Quantifies the impact of the above exposures on City’s financial results
Manages the impact of the above exposures in line with the City’s identified level of
risk tolerance
Provides clear delineation of responsibilities and authority, outline a separation of
duties, and ensure reporting of risk is timely and accurate.
Ensures that the impact of any action affecting the City’s position is consistently
quantified, monitored and authorized.
The City’s risk management activities will be conducted consistent with its overall objective of
appropriate risk mitigation and never for purposes of speculation.
D. Policy Administration
This Policy has been approved by the Executive Risk Management Committee and The
Utility Committee of the Dover City Council. The Utility Committee must approve
modifications to the Policy with the exception of the appendix information which can
be modified with the approval of the Executive Risk Management Committee.
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS
This Policy articulates the management and organization of the City and TEA to serve
as a control framework outlining delegation of duties and responsibilities.
4
Page 6
A. Utility Committee of The City Council
The Utility Committee of The City Council (The Committee) has a responsibility to
provide approval of this Policy. With this approval, The Committee also assumes
additional duties. They will understand the risks the City is and could be exposed to
due to their energy commodity risk management activities. In this role, the Committee
will have a responsibility to also understand the City’s policies and procedures, internal
controls and systems which are used to help manage the City’s energy commodity
risks.
The Committee will approve any amendments to the Policy or limits within. The
Executive Risk Management Committee will update the Committee periodically
regarding the Policy and its functions. It will be the Committee’s responsibility to:
Discuss guidelines and strategic policies that govern the process by which the
Energy Risk Management Committee assesses and manages risks
Review and approve the risk policy at least annually
Approve new members of the Executive Risk Management Committee
Acknowledge the risk inherent in transactions covered under this Policy
B. Executive Risk Management Committee
An Executive Risk Management Committee (“ERMC”) has been formed to provide
executive management oversight for the City’s energy commodity risk management
activities. The ERMC is charged with the creation, amendment and administration of
this Policy, including acquiring any approvals required by the Utility Committee, and
will ensure that all energy commodity risk management activities of the City are
performed consistent with this Policy. The ERMC will meet at least monthly to review
compliance and conduct its business as described in this Policy.
The ERMC shall be comprised of the following voting members: The City Manager,
The Director of Utility, The City’s Controller and TEA’s Member Service Manager.
The City’s ERMC will make decisions following the process outlined in this Policy.
TEA’s Member Services Manager may include representatives from other areas within
TEA in the monthly ERMC meetings who will attend in person or by conference call as
non-voting advisors. Other City employees and TEA staff may also be asked to attend
meetings from time-to-time, as the ERMC deems necessary. The responsibilities of the
ERMC shall include:
Establish scope and frequency for management reporting to the Utility Committee.
No less than annually, review the City’s Energy Commodity Policies and Procedures
for correctness and completeness.
5
Page 7
Review and approve any new risk report or change to an existing risk report
provided by TEA to monitor risks outlined in this Policy.
Understand and approve any models, methodologies, and assumptions used for
measuring risks such as volume risk, process risk, counterparty risk and commodity
risk.
Monitor the City’s risks and ensure they are within the limits and are being
managed according to what is indicated within the City’s Policy and associated
procedures
Understand the City’s risk management objectives and risk tolerances.
Review and approve the risk management and trading strategy programs and
associated risk. Each program should be reviewed to ensure alignment with Policy
objectives and compliance with risk limits within this Policy.
Periodically review any risk management program approved in light of recent
market changes, and ensure continued compliance with its established guidelines
Review and approve new products, markets, trading counterparties and credit
limits
Review all violations and exceptions to this Policy and report such to the
Committee.
Approve the individuals or companies that engage in the City’s commodity
transactions and are subject to the limits within this Policy.
Ensure that the individuals or companies authorized to transact on behalf of the City
as well as manage its risks, are appropriately trained and qualified.
Ensure independence and segregation of duties between front, middle and back
office at TEA.
Recommend changes to this Policy to the City’s Utility Committee for approval and
ensure the Utility Committee understands the City’s overall compliance with this Policy
and associated procedures
The ERMC will meet at least monthly to review risks identified and reported on by the
Policy, this meeting shall be chaired by The City Manager. Minutes of each meeting of
the ERMC shall be recorded and reflect any decisions and follow-up action items to be
performed. These minutes will be reviewed and approved by the members of the
ERMC in a timely manner.
Each member of the ERMC has a unique role as defined below:
1. City Manager
The City Manager is independent of all commercial functions and carries the
responsibility of establishment and maintenance of risk management for the City. The
City Manager will be a voting member of the ERMC and act as a chair of the ERMC.
Other responsibilities include:
Ensure this Policy is maintained.
6
Page 8
Oversee reviews of the City’s energy commodity risks, limits, risk measurement
methodologies and models, and programs and recommend changes to the ERMC.
Ensure potential transactions and their impacts on the City’s risks and limits defined
within this Policy.
Develop and monitor the implementation of the Policy, and oversee other risk
management processes and procedures established by this Policy or otherwise by
the ERMC.
2. Director of the Utility
The Director of the Utility is responsible for all trading, hedging, pricing, structuring,
and market and operational risk management activities associated with the City. The
Director of the Utility will be a voting member of the ERMC. Other responsibilities
include:
Review the effectiveness of transaction processing systems and procedures relating
to risk measurement.
Recommend operational risk and business risk assessment guidelines.
3. Controller
The Controller is independent of all commercial functions and carries the responsibility
of the City’s accounting practices. The Controller will be a voting member on the
ERMC. Other responsibilities include:
Perform financial accounting including accounting for hedging and derivatives
activities.
Comply with tax rules and make appropriate tax elections.
Record realized and unrealized gains and losses.
Reconcile general ledger, cash transactions and margin accounts.
Implement tax-hedge accounting policies and other regulatory tax requirements.
Develop and maintain documentation outlining standard procedures for conducting
business.
Invoice counterparties and resolve billing disputes.
Perform daily/weekly/monthly transaction checkout with counterparties.
Develop and maintain documentation outlining standard procedures for conducting
business.
4. TEA Member Services Manager
The TEA Member Service Manager roles and responsibilities are defined exhibit B of the
EMA between the City and TEA. The TEA Member Service Manager will be a voting
member on the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:
7
Page 9
Monitor risk reports between ERMC meetings.
Report to the Committee and the ERMC on the City’s adherence to all limits and
functions within this policy.
Engage the ERMC in discussions regarding events or developments that could
expose the company to potential losses.
Recommend to the ERMC specific risk limits consistent with the City’s risk
management objectives, risk tolerance, and risk management policy.
Coordinate and distribute independent market fundamental analysis.
Provide advisory support and recommendations as specified in Article 5 of the
EMA.
DISCUSSION OF RISKS
This Policy covers the management of all material energy market risks faced by the City. A
comprehensive list of risks that are or could be relevant to City is shown in Appendix C of the
Policy. Among the most critical of these risks are commodity risk, counterparty risk, process
risk, volume risk, and budget risk. These risks are measured by the limit structure and controls
outlined in the Policy.
Commodity risk represents the potential adverse impacts to the value of the City’s
portfolio due to changes in the market. Commodity risk encompasses volatility risk,
forward price risk, basis risk, correlation risk and liquidity risk.
Counterparty risk represents the potential losses the City could incur due to delivery
risk and receivable risk. Delivery risk stems from a supplier or trading counterparty
that is unable or unwilling to perform on its commitments including but not limited to
delivery or receipt of commodities. Receivable Risk includes the City’s risk associated
with a counterparty’s timeliness of payment for services rendered.
Process risks represents the risks associated with process problems including, but not
limited to, inaccurate data capture, untimely trade execution or settlement problems.
Controls over process risks are embedded in the organizational structure of TEA
through the design processes and operating procedures.
Volume Risk represents the potential for unforeseen changes from projections of excess
or shortfall of capacity or energy from the actual needs. When variances are large
coupled with large costs to transact and adverse moves in market prices this risk could
be realized. In management of this risk, the City must be aware of the fact that
unexpected variations in volume are often highly correlated with price movements.
8
Page 10
Budget Risk represents the potential to deviate outside of tolerable bounds of the City’s
budget. Deviations from budget can be caused by forecast error or unforeseeable
adverse changes in market prices.
MARKETING AND TRADING PRACTICES
A. Standards of Conduct
Individuals authorized to transact for the City shall not misrepresent, conceal or
withhold information regarding energy commodity trading and risk management
transactions to any person responsible for the accurate recording and/or reporting of
such transactions; participate in any such transaction or similar activity for the benefit
of any party other than the City; or hold or be a beneficiary of any financial interest in
any entity with which the employee is engaged in trading or other business activity
(other than ownership of an interest in a mutual fund managed by another party).
Further, no employee authorized to place or execute such transactions may engage in
trading power or energy commodities derivative instruments for his or her personal
account.
B. Products, Activities and Limitations
Pursuant to achieving the City’s core objectives for the purpose of energy commodity
risk management, the following limitations shall apply.
Permissible instruments will be restricted to the products and instruments specified
in Appendix A – Approved Products of the Policy;
o All physical forward transactions shall be governed by the Edison Electrical
Institutive (EEI), North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB), or
similar agreements with counterparties approved by the City.
o The City reserves the right to enter into financial hedge transactions to
effectuate Policy objectives, but does not authorize TEA to enter into financial
hedge transactions on its behalf. Any such financial transactions that the City
may enter into shall be governed by ISDA agreements with counterparties as
approved by the City.
The maturity for each permissible instrument will be restricted to the maturity limits
specified in the risk limits section of the Policy.
Transaction volumes for each risk management transaction will be restricted to the
amounts specified in the Risk Limits section of the Policy.
Risk management transactions will be outlined in the City of Dover Hedge Program
which will be approved by the ERMC. Risk management transactions may include
the following:
o Hedging the forward price of purchased power for delivery to the City as
needed to meet its electric load requirements.
9
Page 11
o Hedging the forward price of natural gas and fuels as needed to generate
power to meet the City’s electric load requirements.
o Unwinding of hedges to accommodate changes in expected load
requirements, or for economic reasons subject to explicit constraints set by the
ERMC.
C. Contract Documentation and Confirmations
No over-the-counter transaction may be executed until an EEI, NAESB, or similar
agreement has been authorized by the City, approved by the ERMC and fully executed
by the parties.
Written confirmations will be required from counterparties, as defined in the Master
Service Agreement between the City and counterparty, within one business day or such
longer time as required by the contract in question for all risk management transactions.
Contemporaneous with any commitments and prior to receipt of written confirmations,
verbal commitments shall be memorialized internally as to instrument structure,
quantity, relevant time horizon, price and any other relevant terms; such internal
documentation shall be time stamped and correlated to the ultimate written
confirmation to or from the counterparty. Both the internal documentation as well as
the written confirmation from the counterparty shall be provided to TEA’s Risk Control
Group immediately upon receipt for verification.
In the event that there is a material failure to provide timely documentation or
confirmations, then at the City Manager’s sole discretion, the offending individual’s
authorization may be suspended. Similarly, if the failure to provide timely
documentation or confirmations is due to the failure of counterparty, then at the
discretion of the City Manager, a moratorium may be imposed on transactions with that
counterparty. In such cases, the City Manager shall notify the ERMC of the issues
leading to the suspension or moratorium shall.
Nothing herein shall inhibit the City Manager from bringing control issues to the TEA’s
Member Services Manager prior to a decision on materiality or the imposition of a
suspension of trading privileges or counterparty moratorium.
D. Training
The ERMC will ensure that all City employees and/or TEA Staff that will execute
transactions on behalf of the City will have appropriate training in the markets in which
the transactions occur.
10
Page 12
E. New Product Protocol
As required to manage the City’s energy commodity risk the ERMC shall approve new
products provided the requirements of the New Product Approval Procedure are met.
RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS
A. Limits
The limit structure is designed to quantify the types of risk in City’s energy commodity
portfolio. The City will manage and report on its energy commodity market risk using
Volume/Maturity/Value Limits, a Cost of Service Limit and a Hedge Loss Limit.
1. Volume/Maturity/Value Limits
Transaction limits for the Individuals Authorized to execute transactions and the
maturity limits for each permissible instrument are listed below. Transactions for
amounts in excess of those listed may be executed only upon approval of the ERMC.
This limit, maturity and value structure is not intended for use when transacting day-
ahead and real time in the PJM market.
Maximum Daily Notional Limits
Volume/Maturity/Value Limits
Volume Value ($000)
Balance of the Month through 12 Months 50 20,000
Power Between 13 Months and 24 Months 50 20,000
(MW) Between 25 Months and 36 Months 25 10,000
Hourly Limit Between 37 Months and 48 Months 25 10,000
Between 49 Months and 60 Months 25 10,000
Balance of the Month through 12 Months 30,000 400
Natural Gas Between 13 Months and 24 Months 30,000 400
(MMBtu) Between 25 Months and 36 Months 10,000 200
Monthly Limit Between 37 Months and 48 Months 10,000 200
Between 49 Months and 60 Months 10,000 200
Balance of the Month through 12 Months 6,000 400
#2/#6 Fuel Oil Between 13 Months and 24 Months 6,000 400
(Bbl) Between 25 Months and 36 Months 3,000 200
Monthly Limit Between 37 Months and 48 Months 3,000 200
Between 49 Months and 60 Months 3,000 200
The amounts in the table above refer to the maximum volume of orders that can be
placed in any one day the individuals authorized to conduct trades for the specified
time period. On any one day the maximum transaction volume placed can be for up to
50 MegaWatts per hour for every hour during a single calendar month (including both
on-peak and off-peak hours), OR 25,000 MMBtu per month for all months pertinent to
the natural gas transaction, OR 6,000 Bbl per month for all months pertinent to the oil
transaction.
11
Page 13
For no reason should a transaction be executed that exceeds the City’s electric load
requirements. If there is an adjustment to the City’s electric load requirements and the
existing transactions greater than 100% of the adjusted electric load requirements the
ERMC will review and approve the offsetting strategy deployed in sufficient proportion
to mitigate the encroachment.
B. Stress Testing and Back Testing
The City’s positions shall be periodically stress tested and models shall be back tested.
The processes around these tests are outlined in the Stress Testing and Back Testing
Procedure.
C. Instances of Exceeding Risk Limits
Should the City or TEA enter into a transaction that causes the portfolio to exceed any
above mentioned limits the Director of the Utility shall, in addition to notifying the
ERMC, also notify the Chair of The Committee as soon as practicable and shall provide
periodic reports to the Chair on the status the transactions for as long as the City is
exceeding its limits. The ERMC will review and determine whether any liquidation or
offsetting of transactions is warranted. The incident will be documented as a Policy
Exception by the Director of the Utility.
CREDIT POLICY
Credit Risk is the risk due to the uncertainty in a counterparty’s ability to meet its
contractual obligations. The primary objective of this credit policy is to mitigate, to the
extent commercially reasonable, the credit risks associated with transactions covered in
this Policy while still allowing the City to achieve its objectives.
A. Measuring Credit Risk
The status of credit risk will be measured and reported through reports provided by
TEA.
The current credit exposure will be reported at the agreement level via a Counterparty
Credit Report provided by TEA. This information will be made available in real time to
TEA trading personnel so that it can be checked prior to executing transactions for the
City. Those responsible for risk oversight at the City and TEA will have access to this
information no less frequently than once per day. The ERMC will monitor overall
credit utilization and any credit exceptions at least monthly. When measuring the
12
Page 14
current credit risk, netting will be applied to the exposure if the City’s contract with a
counterparty includes provisions for netting.
B. Analysis and Extension of Credit Limits
Physical and financial commodity transactions will be executed with counterparties
approved by the ERMC with credit available to support the transactions. The
creditworthiness of a counterparty will be determined by both qualitative and
quantitative factors. Factors shall include, but not limited to:
A company’s debt credit ratings provided by the rating agencies.
Financial data such as an analysis of the income statement, balance sheet, and cash
flow, as well as liquidity and capital structure.
Subjective factors such as company’s fuel diversity, overall size, risk management
policy and internal controls, geographic diversity, and market intelligence.
A credit limit is the amount of unsecured credit granted to a counterparty. Unsecured
credit exposure includes amounts owed by the counterparty, whether billed or not, and
the mark-to-market differences in value of any collateral which the counterparty has
provided the City. Any net exposure above the collateral threshold will require the
posting of collateral by a counterparty. Further information on the City’s procedure for
establishing credit is contained in the Counterparty & Credit Review Process.
Collateral thresholds, term limitations and credit exposure limits will be subject to the
maximums indicated in Appendix B, based upon the lower of the S&P and Moody’s
credit ratings.
At no time will the City incur a credit exposure with any counterparty greater than
$60,000,000.
C. Instances of Exceeding Credit Limits
The City and TEA are restricted by the credit limits approved by the ERMC. The ERMC
can suspend trading with a counterparty, if that counterparty’s credit limit has been
reached or exceeded. The City or TEA traders shall not exceed the Counterparty
Credit Limit by executing transactions with any counterparty without approval of the
ERMC.
The ERMC will determine when it’s appropriate to require additional collateral if a
counterparty’s credit exposure exceeds its credit limit. Collateral includes standing
letter of credit, cash, and prepayments.
All credit exceptions will be documented and reported to the ERMC and the Committee
as Policy Exceptions.
13
Page 15
REPORTING
A. Risk Reporting
Preparation of timely reports is critical to monitoring risk. TEA will furnish the
required reports on a regular frequency for the City in a format acceptable to the ERMC.
In addition, the ERMC and its designees will be provided access to the City’s risk
reports as updated daily via TEA’s secure Web Portal.
Reports required on a monthly basis and for periodic meetings of the ERMC include the
following:
Profit and Loss Report
The Profit and Loss (P&L) Report shows the daily realization of transactions at either
the transaction price or the market price as transaction roll from unrealized to realized.
This report should show volumes, transaction prices and market prices of realized
physical and financial power and fuel transactions.
Mark to Market Report
The Mark to Market (“MTM”) Report conveys the potential transaction exposure if the
energy commodity portfolio was liquidated at the most recent market settlement prices.
This report should show volumes, transaction prices and market prices of unrealized
physical and financial power and fuel transactions.
Activity Report
The Activity Report presents a summary of all energy commodity risk management
activities undertaken, including new transactions taken, existing transactions
settled/liquidated, and any transactions unwound.
Cost of Service Report
The City’s exposure to energy price risk shall be monitored and reported on a Cost-of-
Service basis. All calculations are at the wholesale level. The Cost-of-Service recognizes
all prior (expired) months within the Power Year on the basis of actual (incurred) costs,
and recognizes all forward (pending) months within the Power Year on the basis of
expected forward power and fuel prices and expected forward load-following risks. As
defined below, the Cost-of-Service is an aggregation of Forward Energy Commodity
Portfolio Cost, the Load Following Cost Expectation and the City’s Budget Target for
Purchase Power Expense.
o The Net Purchased Power Cost shows the net cost of all physical and financial
transactions related to the City’s anticipated commodity requirements for power
and fuel and is based on the price of all hedge transactions plus the forward
14
Page 16
market price of all unhedged transactions valued at current forward prices for
energy commodities, customer-level cost per MWH of all physical and financial
transactions related to Dover’s actual plus anticipated energy.
o The expected fixed costs defined as load-serving entity (LSE) capacity costs,
transmission costs and TEA management fees.
o The Expected Load-Following Cost for a specified power year is defined as the
expected cost (or revenue) associated with intra-month load variations due to
weather or other events affecting demand. As an interim measure due to lack of
necessary market information and the rapid evolution of the PJM RTO market,
the ERMC has specified $2.50 per MWH as an estimate of the Load Following
Cost to be used for estimating the City’s Forward Cost-of-Service Report. The
ERMC will update the Expected Load Following estimate while lack of necessary
market information persists no less than annually.
o The Budget Target for Purchase Power Expense represents the City’s view of
expected purchase power expense.
B. Credit Reporting
Counterparty Credit Report
The Counterparty Credit Report conveys the exposure to all counterparties with which
the City has credit exposure resulting from its energy commodity risk management
activities.
CFTC Reporting
The City understands that transacting over the counter (OTC) swaps carries an
additional Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) reporting function. Once
required by the CFTC, the City will report on how itFPUD[KB1] generally meets its
financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps in a manner
acceptable to the CFTC.
C. Hedge Effectiveness Reporting
If the City’s transactions require a hedge effectiveness test, those testing results will be
reported to the ERMC no later than one month after the end of the financial reporting
period. The report will include a summary of testing methodology, assumptions of the
testing and the outcome of results with a pass or fail by transaction.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS
Since information systems play a vital role in The City’s trading abilities, the City shall
ensure that the information systems and technology used to store all transaction
information is maintained and secure. The City’s transactions will be stored in TEA’s
15
Page 17
enterprise trading and risk management system. TEA uses the TriplePoint Commodity
XL (CXL) system, integrated with Commodity XL for Credit Risk (Credit Risk). TEA
has assigned a Database Administrator (DBA) that is charged with the database security
and maintenance for the transaction database, CXL.
The following safeguards for data security and backup will be installed:
Transaction data stored in the system of record will be replicated daily to ensure
data redundancy;
The CXL database will be backed up at least daily after the close of business.
POLICY DISTRIBUTION AND COUNSEL
A. Distribution Outside The City
The City’s Policy is restricted to the use of the City and TEA organizations. It shall not
be distributed outside these organizations without the consent the ERMC.
B. Designated Counsel
Questions about the interpretation of any matters of this Policy should be referred to
ERMC. The ERMC will provide clarification and explanation on any updates to this
Policy.
All legal matters stemming from this Policy will be referred to the City’s Legal Counsel.
APPENDIX A – Approved Products
The following shall constitute a list of approved forward hedge products to be utilized
by TEA to manage the City’s energy commodity portfolio:
Forward Physical Power Peak
Forward Physical Power Off-Peak
Forward Physical Power All Hours
Forward Physical Natural Gas Delivered Dover via Eastern Shore Pipeline
Forward Physical Residual Fuel Oil (#6) Delivered Dover
Forward Physical Residual Fuel Oil (#2) Delivered Dover
Capacity
Forward Financial Power Peak
Forward Financial Power Off-Peak
Forward Financial Power All Hours
Financial Call Option
Financial Put Option
Covered Swap
16
Page 18
The above instruments can be executed by TEA on behalf of the City of Dover for the
current and next two successive Power Years (July to June).
APPENDIX B – Approved Counterparties and Threshold Tables
This Appendix establishes approved counterparties and their Collateral thresholds.
Collateral thresholds, term limitations and credit exposure limits that are subject to the
following maximums based upon the lower of the S&P and Moody’s credit ratings:
Credit Thresholds from Dover Extended to the Counterparty
Constellation Energy
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 60,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 50,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 50,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 40,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 30,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ 20,000,000 BBB‐ Baa3
$ ‐ Below BBB‐ Below Baa3
Integrys
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 20,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ 1,000,000 BBB‐ Baa3
$ ‐ Below BBB‐ Below Baa3
Sempra Energy
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 20,000,000 A or above A2 or above
$ 20,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3
$ 15,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 10,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or lower Baa3 or lower
Conectiv
17
Page 19
Threshold S&P Moody's
Unspecified * Above BBB+ Above Baa3
$ ‐ Below BBB‐ Below Baa3
* Conectiv does not have a defined credit threshold, so for planning purposes, a
$10,000,000 threshold is imposed as a conservative limit
Macquarie Cook Power
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
FPL Energy
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 30,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 25,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 20,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 15,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 10,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
Deutsche Bank
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
Barclays Bank
Threshold S&P Moody's
$ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
18
Page 20
Credit Thresholds from the Counterparty Extended to Dover
Constellation Energy
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 40,000,000 AA‐ or Above Aa3 or above
$ 30,000,000 A+ A1
$ 20,000,000 A A2
$ 10,000,000 A‐ A3
$ ‐ BBB or below Baa1 or below
Integrys
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 20,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ 1,000,000 BBB‐ Baa3
$ ‐ Below BBB‐ Below Baa3
Sempra Energy
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 27,000,000 A‐ or above A3 or above
$ 5,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 1,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or lower Baa3 or lower
Conectiv
Threshold Fitch Moody's
Unspecified * Above BBB+ Above Baa3
$ ‐ Below BBB‐ Below Baa3
*Conectiv does not have a defined credit threshold, so for planning purposes, a
$10,000,000 threshold is imposed as a conservative limit
19
Page 21
Macquarie Cook Power
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ AA3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
FPL Energy
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 23,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 18,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ AA3 to Aa1
$ 13,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 8,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 3,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
Deutsche Bank
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ AA3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
Barclays Bank
Threshold Fitch Moody's
$ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa
$ 20,000,000 AA‐ to AA+ AA3 to Aa1
$ 15,000,000 A‐ to A+ A3 to A1
$ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1
$ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2
$ ‐ BBB‐ or below Baa3 or below
20
Page 22
APPENDIX C – Business Risks
Business Risks Topology
Commodity Counterpart
Process Risk Volume Risk Budget Risk
Risk y Risk
Receivables Market Load Market
Price Risk
Risk Deadline Risk Uncertainty Uncertainty
Performance Reporting Load
Volume Risk Supply Risk
Risk Risk Uncertainty
M2M/Forward Generation
Forecast Error
Curve Risk Uncertainty
Liquidity Risk
Basis Risk
APPENDIX D – Glossary
Back Office – That part of a trading organization which handles transaction accounting,
confirmations, management reporting, and working capital management.
Bilateral Transaction - Any physical or financial transaction between two
counterparties, neither of whom is an Exchange or market entity (e.g. MISO).
Capacity – The real power output rating of a generator or system, typically in
megawatts, measured on an instantaneous basis.
Commodity - A basic good used in commerce that is interchangeable with other
commodities of the same type. Commodities are most often used as inputs in the
production of other goods or services. The quality of a given commodity may differ
slightly, but it is essentially uniform across producers. When they are traded on an
exchange, commodities must also meet specified minimum standards, also known as a
basis grade.
21
Page 23
Financial Bilateral Transaction – A Bilateral Transaction that is non-physical and is
defined by a Source Point, Sink Point, and Delivery Point that may be any CP Nodes as
specified by the Midwest ISO.
Financial Forward – An agreement regarding a position in a specified commodity, a
specified price, and a specified future settlement date, that does not result in physical
delivery of the commodity. Rather one party in the agreement makes a payment to the
other party on the basis of the commodity price at the future date.
Front Office – That part of a trading organization which solicits customer business,
services existing customers, executes trades and ensures the physical delivery of
commodities.
Hedging Transaction - A transaction designed to reduce the exposure of a specific
outstanding position or portfolio; “fully hedged” equates to complete elimination of the
targeted risk and “partially hedged” implies a risk reduction of less than 100%.
Mark-to-Market Value – A measure of the current value of unrealized positions;
includes both Open Positions and Closed Positions.
Middle Office – That part of a trading organization that measures and reports on
market risks, develops risk management policies and monitors compliance with those
policies, manages contract administration and credit, and keeps management and the
Board informed on risk management issues.
Policy – Dover’s Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk, as amended and
approved by The Utility Committee.
Portfolio – A collection of transactions.
Realized Gains/(Losses) – The amount earned (or lost) from a transaction , considered
to be realized once the time for performance has lapsed (e.g. delivery of power in the
case of physical transactions or expiration of an option in the case of financial
transactions).
Term – The total duration of a contract, defined as the number of days between the
beginning flow date and ending flow date, inclusive.
Unrealized Gains/ (Losses) – The amount expected to earn (lose) on a specific
transaction(s); however, the time for performance has not lapsed. The total value of
Unrealized Gains/ (Losses) is the Mark-to-Market value.
22
Page 24
APPENDIX D – Swap Transaction Representative
Purpose:
To ensure that XXXX, a Special Entity under the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act,
selects a qualified representative (“Representative”) to provide advice and guidance
when entering into swap transactions with Swap Dealers or Major Swap Participants.
Definitions:
Special Entity: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 6s(h)(2)(C) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R.
23.401(c). XXXX is a Special Entity as defined by 17 C.F.R. 23.401(c)(2).
Swap Dealer: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a(49) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 1.3(ggg)
Major Swap Participant: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a(33) and further interpreted in 17
C.F.R. 1.3(hhh)
Representative: As defined in this policy and 17 C.F.R. 23.450
Policy:
Selection: XXXX shall endeavor to seek and employ an individual or entity that will
voluntarily act as a Representative for all energy commodity swap transactions between
XXXX and any Swap Dealer or Major Swap Participant. The Representative must meet
the following qualifications identified in 17 C.F.R. 23.450(b):
(i) Has sufficient knowledge to evaluate the transaction and risks;
(ii) Is not subject to a statutory disqualification;
(iii) Is independent of the swap dealer or major swap participant;
(iv) Undertakes a duty to act in the best interests of the Special Entity it represents;
(v) Makes appropriate and timely disclosures to the Special Entity;
(vi) Evaluates, consistent with any guidelines provided by the Special Entity, fair
pricing and the appropriateness of the swap; and
(vii) In the case of a Special Entity as defined in § 23.401(c)(2) or (4), is subject to
restrictions on certain political contributions imposed by the Commission, the
Securities and Exchange Commission, or a self-regulatory organization subject to
the jurisdiction of the Commission or the Securities and Exchange Commission;
provided however, that this paragraph (b)(1)(vii) of this section shall not apply if
the representative is an employee of the Special Entity.
The Representative and XXXX shall enter into a legal agreement that binds the
Representative to comply with items (i) through (vii) in this policy.
At no longer than any 12 month interval, XXXX shall review the performance of the
Representative to ensure compliance with items (i) through (vii) in this policy.
23